Creighton University School of Medicine-Phoenix Regional Campus, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Department of Anesthesia, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Ave., Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2020 Mar 20;24(5):16. doi: 10.1007/s11916-020-00849-9.
This comprehensive review of current concepts in the management of vertebral compression fractures is a manuscript of vertebral augmentation literature of risk factors, clinical presentation, and management. The objective of this review is to compare outcomes between multiple augmentation techniques and ongoing discussions of effectiveness of vertebral augmentation procedures.
Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) are a prevalent disease affecting approximately 1.5 million US adults annually. VCFs can cause severe physical limitations, including back pain, functional disability, and progressive kyphosis of the thoracic spine that ultimately results in decreased appetite, poor nutrition, impaired pulmonary function, and spinal cord compression with motor and sensory deficits. The deconditioning that affects patients with vertebral compression fractures leads to mortality at a far higher rate than age-matched controls. The management of vertebral compression fractures has been extensively discussed with opponents arguing in favor or restricting conservative management and against augmentation, while proponents argue in favor of augmentation. The literature is well established in reference to the effects on mortality when patients undergo treatment with vertebral augmentation; in over a million patients with vertebral compression fractures treated with vertebral augmentation as compared with patients treated with non-surgical management, the patients receiving augmentation performed well with a decrease in morbidity and mortality. Summary of the literature review shows that understanding the risk factors, appropriate clinical evaluation, and management strategies are crucial. Analysis of the evidence shows, based on level I and II studies, balloon kyphoplasty had significantly better and vertebroplasty tended to have better pain reduction compared with non-surgical management. In addition, balloon kyphoplasty tended to have better height restoration than vertebroplasty.
本综述全面介绍了目前椎体压缩性骨折管理方面的概念,涉及椎体增强文献中的风险因素、临床表现和管理等内容。本文的目的是比较多种增强技术的结果,并讨论椎体增强术的有效性。
椎体压缩性骨折(VCF)是一种常见疾病,每年影响约 150 万美国成年人。VCF 可导致严重的身体限制,包括背痛、功能障碍和胸腰椎进行性后凸畸形,最终导致食欲下降、营养不良、肺功能受损以及脊髓受压导致运动和感觉功能障碍。影响椎体压缩性骨折患者的身体失能导致其死亡率远高于年龄匹配的对照组。椎体压缩性骨折的管理已经进行了广泛的讨论,反对者主张限制保守治疗和反对增强,而赞成者则主张增强。关于患者接受椎体增强治疗对死亡率的影响,文献已有充分记载;在 100 多万例接受椎体压缩性骨折椎体增强治疗的患者与接受非手术治疗的患者相比,接受增强治疗的患者表现良好,发病率和死亡率均降低。文献综述分析表明,了解风险因素、进行适当的临床评估和管理策略至关重要。基于 I 级和 II 级研究的分析表明,球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术在改善疼痛方面明显优于非手术治疗,椎体成形术也有改善疼痛的趋势。此外,球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术在恢复椎体高度方面优于椎体成形术。